Removal Of Surgical Drains Research Articles

Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (PrevenaTM) vs. conventional post-operative dressing after immediate breast reconstruction: a randomized controlled clinical trial

BackgroundSurgical complications following breast reconstruction remain a significant concern. This study aimed to investigate if incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) using Prevena™ provides superior wound treatment for patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) compared to conventional postoperative dressing. Additionally, we investigated whether intraoperative indocyanine green angiography (ICG-A) could predict and prevent postoperative complications.MethodsA randomized controlled study (RCT) comprising 39 patients was conducted. The primary outcome was time until surgical drain removal. ICG-A was applied to evaluate tissue perfusion and compared to rate of postoperative complications. Patients were followed for one year, including postoperative complications, quality of life (QoL), scar evaluation, incidence of lymphedema and timely administration of adjuvant therapy.ResultsNo significant differences were observed in time to surgical drain removal, hospitalization or incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups. Analysis revealed no significant association between ICG-A results and postoperative complications. After one year, both groups exhibited similar QoL and satisfaction with scars. One patient developed lymphedema during follow-up, and adjuvant treatment was timely administered in 82%.ConclusionsThis RCT investigated iNPWT by Prevena™ compared to conventional postoperative dressing in IBR using implants or tissue expanders. ICG-A was applied to assess tissue perfusion and compared to postoperative complications. We did not find any significant differences in recovery time, hospitalization duration, postoperative complication rates, QoL, or scar satisfaction between the two groups within a one-year follow-up. Additionally, there were no significant association between ICG-A and postoperative complications. Larger randomized studies incorporating intraoperative ICG-A are needed to obtain higher quality data.Level of Evidence: Level I, Risk/Prognostic

Effectiveness of fibrin sealants in head and neck surgery: a systematic review protocol.

This review will investigate the effectiveness of fibrin sealants in adult patients who underwent head and neck surgery. Controlling bleeding is important in head and neck surgery. Complications involving nearby vital structures increase the risk of morbidity and mortality. Surgical tissue adhesives are used in addition to other traditional hemostatic methods to reduce surgical site bleeding. Fibrin sealants have shown some success compared with other tissue adhesives, but individual studies have been inconclusive. We will include studies comparing fibrin sealants with placebo or usual care in patients 18 years or older who have undergone soft tissue surgery of the head and neck with drain placement. Primary outcomes include wound complications and time to surgical drain removal. Secondary outcomes include length of hospital stay, drain volume output, surgical management of postoperative hematoma, rate of blood transfusions, and adverse reactions. We will search electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science) for studies published from 1975 onwards. Sources to be search for unpublished literature will include ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MedNar, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Titles, abstracts, and full-text papers will be assessed against the inclusion criteria by 2 independent reviewers. Study screening and selection will be performed, and critical appraisal conducted using the standardized JBI appraisal tools. Data will be extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analysis will be conducted for all outcomes where appropriate, with weighted mean differences for continuous data. Risk ratios will be used for dichotomous data. Certainty will be reported using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. PROSPERO CRD42023412820.

Patient-performed at-home surgical drain removal is safe and feasible following hernia repair and abdominal wall reconstruction

BackgroundTraditionally, surgical drains are considered a relative contraindication to telemedicine-based postoperative care. We sought to assess the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of an at-home patient-performed surgical drain removal pilot program. MethodsA prospective cohort study among patients who were discharged with surgical drains was performed. Patients discharged with drains were given the option for in-clinic, provider-performed removal, or at-home, patient-performed drain removal. Patient demographics, health characteristics, perioperative metrics, and operative outcomes were compared and analyzed. ResultsA total of 68 encounters with drain removal were included (at-home: 28%, n = 19; in-clinic: 72%, n = 49), with both groups having similar demographics, except for age (median age of telemedicine-based at-home: 50 vs in-clinic: 62 years, p = 0.03). Patients who opted into at-home, patient-performed drain removal were more likely to have drain removal occur earlier (9 vs 13 days for in-clinic, p < 0.001). In-clinic removal resulted in increased encounters with surgical nursing staff and increased travel time, with no significant difference in complication burden. ConclusionsPatient-performed at-home drain removal is safe and allows for more timely drain removal.

Initial experience of transurethral-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site nephroureterectomy

PurposeWe describe a new transurethral technique for distal ureter management and the improvement of intraoperative exposure during LESS-NU. MethodsA total of 20 transurethral assisted LESS-NU were performed between May 2018 and December 2020 in our institution. The access route for the operation was via a single-port, with four channels placed through a transumbilical incision. After the lower ureter was separated from the bladder wall, a 1470 laser working channel was placed through the urethra to precisely cut the ureteral orifice. Following this, a self-made urethra auxiliary port was inserted through the bladder cuff opening to facilitate a resection of the ureter and kidney. The peri-operative and postoperative data were then retrospectively collected and analysed. ResultsAll procedures were completed successfully and one patient needed an additional port. The mean operative time was 196.8 ± 45.8 min and the mean estimated blood loss was 58.9 ± 32.0 ml. The days required for the surgical drain removal and the hospital stay were 4.6 ± 4.6 and 11.1 ± 6.4 days, respectively. One patient developed a fever following surgery but there were no major complications. During the average follow-up period, which lasted 25.5 months, one patient developed spinal cord metastasis and died 8 months after surgery. No obvious abnormalities were found in any of the other patients. ConclusionThe tansurethral approach of the distal ureter for LESS-NU is deemed safe and efficient. The technique used offers accurate control of the distal ureter and good exposure of LESS.

The formulation of an enhanced recovery programme for patients undergoing laryngectomy.

Enhanced recovery programmes have been widely adopted in other surgical disciplines but are not commonplace in head and neck surgery. The authors of this study created a pathway for post-operative laryngectomy patients. A multidisciplinary working group reviewed the literature and agreed standards of care. A retrospective audit was conducted to measure current practice against our new pathway; after programme implementation our performance was reaudited in two prospective cycles, with an education programme and review after the first prospective cycle. Statistically significant improvement in performance was realised in catheter and surgical drain removal, opiate analgesia use, mobilisation, and timeliness of swallow assessment. The rate of hospital acquired pneumonia reduced from 23.1 to 9.5 per cent and length of stay reduced by a median of 5.2 days to 14.8 days (non-significant). The programme improved consistency of patient care across most areas that were measured. Improving patient stoma training needs to be prioritised.

Robotic versus Laparoscopic Retroperitoneal Lymph node Dissection for Clinical Stage I Non-seminomatous Germ Cell Tumor of Testis: A Comparative Analysis.

To compare the treatment outcomes of robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) versus laparoscopic RPLND (L-RPLND) for clinical stage I non-seminomatous germ cell testicular tumors (NSGCTs). We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with stage I NSGCTs who underwent robotic or laparoscopic RPLND between 2008 and 2017. Perioperative data and oncologic outcomes were reviewed and compared between the two groups. Progression-free survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and compared between two groups. A total of 31 and 28 patients underwent R-RPLND and L-RPLND respectively. The preoperative characteristics of the patients were comparable in the two groups. Patients in R-RPLND group had significantly shorter median operative time (140 vs. 175 minutes, P < .001), a shorter median duration to surgical drain removal (2 vs. 4 days, P = .002) and a shorter median postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days, P = .001). There were no statistical differences in intra- and post-operative complication rate between the groups and the oncologic outcomes were similar in the two groups. In expert hands, R-RPLND and L-RPLND were comparable in oncological parameter and morbidity rate; R-RPLND showed superiority in operation duration, median days to surgical drain removal and postoperative hospital stay for stage I NSGCTs. Multicenter and randomized studies with good power of study and sufficient follow-up duration are required to validate our result.

Variation in Drain Management After Pancreatoduodenectomy

The objectives are to report practice patterns and management of operatively placed drains and to compare outcomes in patients with early versus delayed drain removal after pancreatoduodenectomy. Early drain removal after pancreatoduodenectomy, when guided by postoperative day (POD) 1 drain fluid amylase (DFA-1), is associated with reduced rates of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). However, whether surgeons have altered their management based on this strategy is unknown. The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) 2014 Participant Use File was queried to identify patients having undergone pancreatoduodenectomy (n = 3093). Patients with intraoperatively placed drains were stratified according to measurement of DFA-1 and day of drain removal. Patients with POD 1 DFA-1 of ≤5000 U/L whose drains were removed by POD 3 were propensity score-matched with patients whose drains were removed after POD 3. Of 2698 patients, 580 (21.5%) had a DFA-1 recorded. Measurement of DFA-1 was associated with earlier time to drain removal and shorter postoperative length of stay (P < 0.01). Propensity score matching revealed that early drain removal when DFA-1 was ≤5000 U/L was associated with significant (P < 0.05) reductions in overall morbidity (35.3% vs 52.3%), CR-POPF (0.9% vs 7.9%), and length of stay (6 vs 8 days). Significant variation exists in the use of drain fluid amylase in the management and timing of surgical drain removal after pancreatoduodenectomy. Clinical outcomes are best when drain fluid amylase is low and operatively placed drains are removed by POD 3.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program following hepato- pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgeries – Our experience

Introduction: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is an evidence based multimodal perioperative framework developed to reduce postoperative stress and accelerate recovery. Pancreatic and hepatobiliary surgery being highly complex procedures, our study aims in evaluating the role of ERAS protocol in these surgeries. Methodology: It is a prospective case study where ERAS protocol has been applied in patients undergoing pancreatic (n = 33) and hepatobiliary (n = 28) surgeries and results were compared with similar established studies. Results: Demographics, preoperative and operative variables have been assessed in both the groups and were compared with similar studies where no significant difference was noted. In pancreatic surgeries, the mean POPH ( postoperative hospital stay) was 8.7 days, only 2 patients had been re-operated and 9 had readmission. Pancreatic fistula was noted in 9 patients while no patients presented with biliary fistula. In hepatobiliary surgeries, the mean POPH was 7.68 days, only 5 patients had readmission. Complications like bile leak and liver failure are noted in only 2 patients. In both the groups there is decrease in flatus time, early removal of surgical drains, nasogastric tube and urinary catheter, early mobilisation and introduction of oral/ feeding jejunostomy feeds. The results were comparable. Discussion: Following ERAS protocols, the length of postoperative stay can be reduced significantly with consistent decrease in readmission and reoperation rates not compromising patient safety together with acceleration in gastrointestinal function in HPB surgeries. Conclusion: The ERAS program implemented in our study was found to be safe and feasible in HPB surgeries in reducing POPH.

Assessment of Image Quality of Repeated Limited Transthoracic Echocardiography After Cardiac Surgery

The use of limited transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) has been restricted in patients after cardiac surgery due to reported poor image quality. The authors hypothesized that the hemodynamic state could be evaluated in a high proportion of patients at repeated intervals after cardiac surgery. Prospective observational study. Tertiary university hospital. The study comprised 51 patients aged 18 years or older presenting for cardiac surgery. Patients underwent TTE before surgery and at 3 time points after cardiac surgery. Images were assessed offline using an image quality scoring system by 2 expert observers. Hemodynamic state was assessed using the iHeartScan protocol, and the primary endpoint was the proportion of limited TTE studies in which the hemodynamic state was interpretable at each of the 3 postoperative time points. Hemodynamic state interpretability varied over time and was highest before surgery (90%) and lowest on the first postoperative day (49%) (p<0.01). This variation in interpretability over time was reflected in all 3 transthoracic windows, ranging from 43% to 80% before surgery and from 2% to 35% on the first postoperative day (p<0.01). Image quality scores were highest with the apical window, ranging from 53% to 77% across time points, and lowest with the subcostal window, ranging from 4% to 70% across time points (p< 0.01). Hemodynamic state can be determined with TTE in a high proportion of cardiac surgery patients after extubation and removal of surgical drains.

What is a better predictor of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD): postoperative day one drain amylase (POD1DA) or the fistula risk score (FRS)?

BackgroundBoth fistula risk score (FRS) and drain amylase in postoperative day 1 (POD1DA) have been promoted as tools to guide placement and removal of surgical drains following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). However, their individual utility has not been compared. MethodsA consecutive cohort of PD patients from 2013 to 2015 were identified from a prospectively collected institutional database. Pearson correlation coefficients and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for FRS (negligible/low vs. moderate/high) and POD1DA of 600 U/L and 5000 U/L as predictors of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). ResultsThe incidence of CR-POPF was 27% in 216 patients. Sensitivity and specificity of FRS, POD1DA >600 U/L, and POD1DA >5000 U/L for predicting CR-POPF were 83% and 55%, 94% and 60%, 33% and 90%. The ROC area under the curve (AUC) for POD1DA >600 U/L (0.764) and FRS (0.749) were not significantly different (p = 0.713). However, POD1DA >5000 U/L (0.615) was significantly worse at predicting CR-POPF (p = 0.015). When FRS and POD1DA >600 U/L were combined; there was no improvement (p = 0.624). DiscussionFRS and POD1DA are equally accurate in predicting CR-POPF. Patients with negligible/low FRS or POD1DA <600 U/L should be considered for drain removal.

Surgical Site Infections in Treatment of Musculoskeletal Tumors: Experience from a Single Oncologic Orthopedic Institution

Objective: Limb-sparing surgery is the mainstay treatment for musculoskeletal tumors thanks to advances in surgical techniques, imaging modalities and multimodal therapies. As patients survive longer, plastic reconstructive procedures and revision surgery are increasingly required after tumor excision. Infection rate is reported to be up to 20% after prosthetic replacement and 30-44% after pelvic resection. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs), identifying the causative microrganisms related to specific surgical procedures and significant risk factors for SSIs. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 723 interventions performed between 2009 and 2015 for oncological conditions. Non neoplastic lesions, aseptic wound complications, non-skeletally mature patients were excluded. Standardised antibiotic prophylaxis was used for different surgical procedures and maintained until removal of surgical drains. Results: Without considering tumor types and surgical sites, the overall infection rate was 8.7% (63/724). Infection occurred in prosthetic reconstruction with an incidence rate of 7.8%, whereas almost half of patients having undergone pelvic surgery got infected and about 20% of patients with spinal surgery and amputations were infected. Pelvic location, malignancy and radiotherapy were related to a major risk of SSI. The causative pathogens were detected in all examined cases. The most frequent pathogens detected by culture included Staphylococcus aureus (27 cases, 47.4%) and S. epidermidis (10 cases, 17.5%). Among the S. aureus cases, 10/27 cases (37%) were methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Sixty-three out of 130 microbial isolations (47.7%) were nosocomial ALERT organisms. Conclusion: Oncologic orthopedic surgery is burdened by frequent and challenging SSIs because of extensive soft tissues dissection, long operative times and poor skin conditions. Patients are immunosuppressed and often have concomitant comorbidities predisposing to SSIs. Monitoring of local bacterial aetiology of SSIs could help orthopedic oncologic specialized centres in achieving the optimisation of antibiotic prophylactic regimens.

Nurse's guide to surgical drain removal.

Nurse's guide to surgical drain removal.

DEVICE FOR REMOVAL OF INADVERTENTLY LEFT DRAINAGE TUBE IN THE FIELD OF SURGERY

The paper presents a description of the device for removal of surgical drains, developed at Novosibirsk RITO, and the experience of its application at the Department of Joint Replacement and Endoscopic Surgery. The device enables to remove a drainage tube or its fragments from a surgical site completely and with minimal damage to surrounding soft tissues in case of its breakage or a threat of breakage. This prevents revision surgery to remove the drain or its fragment, and eliminates the possibility of secondary infection of the wound and complication development.

Fallopian tube herniation: an unusual complication of surgical drain.

Background. Surgical drains have been used since time immemorial, but their use is not without complications. By presenting this case we aim to describe an uncommon complication of herniation of fallopian tube following the simple procedure of surgical drain removal. Case Presentation. This case describes a 23-year G2P1L1 who underwent an emergency cesarean section for obstructed labor with intraperitoneal drain insertion. The patient had an uneventful postoperative period, drain was removed on day 4, and she was discharged. She presented on day 8 with the complaint of soakage of drain site dressing. On examination an edematous, tubular structure with early sign of necrosis was seen coming out of drain site and a provisional diagnosis of appendix herniation was made. On emergency laparotomy fallopian tube was seen coming out through the drain site and salphingectomy was done. Conclusion. Drains are not a substitute for good surgical technique. Although herniation of intestine, omentum, appendix, gall bladder, and ovary have been reported, we could not find any case of fallopian tube herniation in the literature searched by us.

Pharmacokinetics, analgesic effect, and tolerability of a single preprocedural dose of intranasal fentanyl in patients undergoing drain removal after breast reduction or augmentation surgery: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Background: Although acetaminophen is used to reduce pain after breast reduction or augmentation surgery, pain during the removal of the surgical drains is typically not specifically treated. Intranasally administered fentanyl may be suitable for pain control during removal of drains. The reported therapeutic window of fentanyl is between 0.2 and 1.2 ng/mL. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the analgesic effect, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of a single preprocedural dose of intranasal fentanyl administered before removal of surgical drains in patients who had undergone breast reduction or augmentation surgery. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, prospective study in healthy women (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II) between the ages of 18 and 65 years who were scheduled to undergo removal of surgical drains 1 to 4 days after breast reduction or augmentation surgery. A single dose of fentanyl nasal spray 0.05 mg/0.1 mL or placebo (preserved normal saline) 0.1 mL was administered 10 minutes before removal of drains. Because drain removal is generally carried out without specific analgesia, no rescue medication was provided. Pain intensity was measured on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 = no pain at all to 100 = worst pain possible. Pain intensity was evaluated immediately before administration of study medication (t = 0), at the time of drain removal (t = 10), and at 15, 20, 25, 40, and 70 minutes after administration of study medication. Safety measures included oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, heart rate, and blood pressure. Local and systemic adverse events were elicited by direct questioning throughout the study. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected at baseline and at 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after administration of study medication. The population pharmacokinetic parameters of fentanyl were calculated according to a 1-compartment open model with an iterative 2-stage Bayesian fitting procedure. Results: Thirty-six women were randomized to treatment, and 33 completed the study. Their mean (SD) age was 39.2 (13.0) years, and their mean weight was 68.9 (10.7) kg. Mean VAS scores at baseline were 14.8 (17.8) for the fentanyl group and 6.0 (9.7) for the placebo group ( P = NS); at the time of drain removal, the corresponding VAS scores were 31.0 (20.6) and 33.8 (25.7) ( P = NS). Analysis of a random-effects model with mean VAS scores as a function of time as the dependent variable indicated a significant difference in mean VAS scores between the fentanyl and placebo groups ( P = 0.006). The overall incidence of adverse events was 39.4% (13/33). Among the 17 patients in the fentanyl group, 8 reported ≥1 adverse event; among the 16 patients in the placebo group, 9 reported ≥1 adverse event. A mean estimated C max of 0.184 (0.069) ng/mL was reached at 13.76 (3.56) minutes after administration of intranasal fentanyl. The mean measured C max was 0.22 (0.088) ng/mL. Conclusions: In these women who had undergone breast reduction or augmentation surgery, a single preprocedural dose of intranasal fentanyl was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing pain intensity over the hour after removal of surgical drains. However, there was no significant difference in pain intensity between fentanyl at the time of drain removal and placebo. Intranasal fentanyl was generally well tolerated. At the dose used (0.05 mg), plasma fentanyl concentrations were below the reported therapeutic window.

Patient preparation for safe removal of surgical drains

Patient preparation for safe removal of surgical drains

Patient preparation for safe removal of surgical drains

Drains are a common feature of the post-operative management of surgical patients. While drains serve an important function they are also associated with complications such as haemorrhage, tissue inflammation, retrograde bacterial migration and drain entrapment. It is therefore essential that nurses are familiar with the monitoring and management of surgical drains, but also the process involved in their removal.

Technical Notes and Tips: Removal of Surgical Drains

Occasionally, a drain is caught within surrounding soft tissue during closure of a surgical wound. This is clinically difficult to differentiate with a drain that has been inadvertently sutured into the wound. Upon attempted removal, in either situation, the drain may stretch or break and require surgical extraction. A useful technique when faced with this is the application of constant traction on the drain with weights. These can be increased by 5 lb every 15 min until the drain falls out by itself (Fig. 1), thereby avoiding another general anaesthetic and freeing up a member of staff. Figure 1 Removal of drain using traction.

Removal of Surgical Drains

Removal of Surgical Drains

Soft Fluted Silicone Drains: A Prospective, Randomized, Patient-Controlled Study

For some patients, removal of surgical drains can be the most painful part of surgery. The authors present a prospective, randomized, patient-controlled study comparing soft fluted silicone (Blake) drains with conventional rigid (Portavac) drains. After ethical committee approval, 43 patients undergoing bilateral breast reduction surgery were recruited into the study. A Blake drain was inserted on one side and a Portavac drain was inserted on the contralateral side; the patients therefore acted as their own controls. Pain scores were measured on a descriptive scale 10 minutes before, during, and 10 minutes after drain removal. Statistical analysis was carried out using the Wilcoxon signed ranks matched pairs test. The results show that Blake drains are less painful before (p = 0.05), during (p = 0.01), and after removal (p = 0.009). Of those patients who expressed a preference, 27 preferred the Blake drain and 10 preferred the Portavac drain. The authors advocate the use of a silicone fluted (Blake) drain for any wound requiring drainage, especially if large-caliber drains are indicated.